Tuesday, November 28, 2006

While Saturday night's USC-Notre Dame game was disappointing to most Michigan fans because the USC victory moved the Trojans into the #2 spot in the BCS ahead of the Wolverines, there was a far more discouraging event during the game: the announcers' insistence that Notre Dame would make a great Rose Bowl opponent for Michigan. Ugh. I want to see that about as much as OSU fans want to play Michigan again. Thus, the MZone has written the following email to Rose Bowl Executive Director Mitch Dorger. We encourage other Michigan fans - as well as college football fans in general - to do the same by sending a letter to Mitch Dorger's attention at rosepr@rosemail.org.

Dear Mr. Dorger,

As lifelong Michigan fans, we are extremely excited at the prospect of the Wolverines playing in the 2007 Rose Bowl. A trip to the Granddaddy of Them All would be a fantastic cap to a great season.

However, much recent talk about Michigan's opponent, if the Wolverines are selected, has centered on a potential rematch with Notre Dame, something we find about as exciting as a case of kidney stones. Furthermore, I bet most other Michigan fans - as well as college football fans across America - feel the same way.

Who wants to see a replay of a game that wasn't even close the first time?

Michigan already soundly defeated the Irish - on their home field - by 26 points in September. And the Irish, coming off a 20 point pasting at the hands of USC, are not ranked in the top ten in the latest polls, have only defeated one ranked team and were fortunate to pull out wins against lesser teams such as Michigan State and UCLA.

But there is a great match-up out there pitting two top fives teams against each other: #3 Michigan vs. #5 LSU.

Not only would an LSU-Michigan matchup likely be much more competitive than another Michigan-Notre Dame game, the Tigers and Wolverines, despite their storied histories, have never played. In addition, LSU head coach Les Miles played for Michigan under legendary coach Bo Schembechler in the 1970s.

Obviously we understand that a number of issues are considered when selecting teams for your bowl game, such as how a team's fan base travels. But this is not an issue with LSU supporters. Their fans are as ravenous as any in the country and would, we're sure, be delighted at the opportunity to play in their first-ever Rose Bowl.

So please don't give in to the temptation of matching up Michigan and Notre Dame...again. And consider the incredible pairing of two top five teams in Michigan and LSU - as they meet for the first time ever - in Pasadena.

notre dame has the talent for the continental tire bowl...gross that with its high profile, ND will even be playing in january. with that, an SEC team would be fun. two great defenses would be on display.

As a Trojan fan, I'm looking forward to AZ, and think UofM deserves better than ND. Hopefully, the RB selection commitee will choose CFB over TV ratings and match you guys with anyone other than the domers.

1) LSU and Michigan are the most talented teams in the country behind Ohio State. LSU might have a slight edge in the depth of that talent.

2)There's nothing quite like going to your school's first Rose Bowl to jack a team up (see Texas two years ago). An LSU/Michigan matchup brings the possibility of a third consecutive CLASSIC Rose Bowl game.

3) As far as TV ratings are concenered (and I know ND has the initial advantage here), as a neutral football fan, I'm going to watch at least a little bit of the Rose Bowl anyway. I'm going to stick around longer for a close, competitive contest. Notre Dame's lack of team speed would render another contest with Michigan moot by halftime. As a TV viewer, I'm gone long before that.

So Richard Cranium- if UofF and Michigan do play in the Rose, and Florida wins, will you be the first one on here expressing your apologies, or can we expect another full year of your hatred for the SEC? Just making sure we know who we're dealing with here.

So you want a rematch with OSU, but no rematch with ND? Hypocrites. No one cares who you play in the rose bowl, as it's as meaningless this year as any other bowl game, except the National Championship, which you won't be playing in. Play LSU, Boise St, or ND....nobody cares about a team that tied for second in their own conference.

There's only one #1 team in football and basketball and it sure as hell isn't UM.....head south for 3 hours and you'll see who i'm talking about. Geaux Bux!

surrounded........actually, yes....i think every year most bowl games are irrelevant thanks to the awful BCS....i'm for a playoff, like most fans are....i think the only relevance is internally to each program, giving practice time to younger players etc.....last year, the only relevance of our fiesta bowl vs ND was it probably allowed us to be ranked #1 preseason, while ND was #2....and we know how far that got them.

UM vs LSU would only be relevant to fans of those programs.....either way though, i think you guys start next year #1.

It is impossible for Michigan to play Florida in the Rose Bowl. The SEC champ is tied to the Sugar Bowl - if Florida wins Saturday, they MUST play in the Sugar Bowl unless they somehow play in the Championship Game.

If Florida loses, Arkansas goes to the Sugar Bowl. Per these elibility rules, Michigan would NOT be an auto qualifier at #3 because someone from their conference is in the NCG (rule 5). LSU however WOULD be an auto qualifier under rule 6 because they would move up to #4 after Florida loses and their conference would NOT have a participant in the NCS. And as Wisconsin knows, you can't have 3 teams from the same conference in the BCS bowls so both Wisconsin and Florida would be outside looking in.

The only scenario where this doesn't happen is if somehow LSU stays at #5 after a Florida loss, but there's no way current #6 Louisville or current #7 Wisconsin passes them.

So LSU loses to Florida but gets the automatic bid and the Rose Bowl would have to choose between LSU and ND.

As an ND die hard, I would love to see ND play in a Rose Bowl, just not this year against Michigan. We can save that beat down for next year.

I am interested in seeing a Michigan-LSU matchup. I like when two powerhouses play against teams that rarely play, if ever.

That being said, I do think ND should be in a BCS game, the only team that might not make it that has a legitimate beef is Louisville. Maybe WVU, but they just lost to South Florida at home.

ND is a top 10-12 team as they have proved over the two years. They have beaten everyone they were supposed (minus State) and lost the games they were supposed to.

ND just does not have the talent level of the OSU's, USC's, FLA, LSU's Mich.'s of the world to compete consistently with those teams. However, they are getting there with the past two recruiting classes and in a couple of years, they will be able to compete with and beat those teams. But for now, they are a solid 9 or 10 win team who will pull out the games they should and lose to the top teams. I'm just glad Weis and Co. have been able to this much out of that group.

As far as Quinn being overrated, come on, the guy has been phenomenal over the last two years. He didn't play that bad in the Michigan game, two of his picks were good throws that were drops by his receiver or tipped and picked. The offensive line attempted to have him murdered that game. There isnt a QB in the country that would have played much better against the Michigan D that day with the same O-Line. He will be a solid NFL QB (unless he ends up with Art Shell and Co.)

I agree that Michigan has little to no chance of playing Florida based on the automatic tie-ins. However, I think that you are reading the rule incorrectly regarding Michigan's automatic bid. They will get an automatic bid according to rule 5 because they are ranked #3.

Rules #5 and #6 are in place to exclude 3 teams from a single conference from getting into the game. Applied to this year, they are saying that if USC and Florida both lose next weekend, UofM and OSU will go to the NC game but Wisconsin will not get an automatic bid despite the fact that they would be #3 in the BCS standings, since an at-large team from the same conference (UofM) qualified for the NC game.

These rules should be interesting to us UofM fans since they implicitly say that the possibility a NC game between members of the same conference was thought of by the BCS powers.

Anon 10:41,well, i'm not sure i agree w/ your definition of "relevant", but i see your point and have to give you credit for consistency.

i think the other bowls still serve a purpose (beyond hours of entertainment). tosu benefited significantly from its performance in last year's fiesta bowl, as did texas the year before in the rose. these other big games certainly provide "peeks" at next year's contenders.

as for the general discussion on rematches, there seems to be a lot of confusion as to the debate. i don't think there's any hypocrosy as the purpose of the bowls are very different now.

since all of the other bowls are for "show" (relevant or not), rematches should generally be avoided as they don't provide the same entertainment level. regardless of the ND-michigan score, they've already played once. a rematch wouldn't be nearly as entertaining as a new game. lsu -m in the rose and nd-ou/nd-fla would be fresh, more entertaining.

the bcs game is different. the purpose is to provide some sort of an excuse of a playoff game, matching up #1-#2 regardless of the entertainment value. they've already had one rematch (fsu-fla). if at the end of the week, should fla lose to ark and usc lose to ucla, would there be much debate that M was #2?

finally, a playoff system would clearly create rematches, just like all playoffs. the big 12, acc, and sec championship games all create the opportunity for a rematch. an ncaa play off would do the same thing.

if we had a playoff, tosu would be the #1 seed, w/ michigan either #2 or #3. a rematch would be a "likely" bet.

same for last year. usc & UT would have been top seeds. tosu and psu would have both been in the playoffs. a rematch amongst tosu/psu/ut would have been a strong probability.

it's a price fans will end up paying if a playoff system ever comes about.

Mich-ND rematch is not the same as Mich-OSU rematch. The match-ups just don't compare. With Mich-OSU, there are the two best teams in the nation. And sure, Michigan actually has a chance of winning that one, so there should be a good game. Besides, I think that Michigan had a chance in Columbus but made too many mistakes and its players were slipping all over the place.

Notre Dame is not a good team, but USC's win was not as impressive as Michigan's win against ND. Against USC, ND made more mistakes and was just awful. With ND as a bad team with a good record due to a cream puff schedule, it is hardly a threat to Michigan. Why should fans be forced to watch an excellent Michigan team blow out ND again? The second best team in the country deserves better, even if it is ranked #3 and isn't going to the NCG. Even you Buckeye fans can agree with me on that.

Yost, I agree. ND fans (and ND as a program) are pretty classy. I gained more respect for ND. I still hate them though. For chrissakes, get a real schedule. To take it a step further, get over yourselves and join a damn conference already!

You're probably right on rule 5. Michigan's in regardless of them being an auto-qualify or not. Sucks to be Florida though - could you imagine if The Game was played in October and neither team was undefeated and the loser of The Game goes to a BCS bowl while the winner doesn't???

Srudoff, you're wrong, but not for the reason stated above. You're wrong because according to Rule #5, the #3 team is not an auto qualifier if an at-large team from the same conference is in the title game.

OSU is not an at-large team. They are an auto-qualifier as the winners of the Big Ten.

An example of this situation actually being applicable is the 2002 Rose Bowl, in which Nebraska was an At-Large team playing in the Title Game.

Sure, you can look at it like that, but why not actually look at the teams played rather than saying, "Oh, these two teams roughly are of equal caliber", when in fact they are not.

ND played exactly three ranked teams all year: USC, UM, and GT. In all honesty, GT shouldn't even be ranked and is only ranked because the pollsters are too lazy to actually do their job. They have GT, who lost to UGA, ahead of UGA? While UGA did lose 4 games they beat #5 Auburn at home, then beat #16 GT.

So, in all reality, that GT team you struggled with and consider 2nd Tier is 9-3 with only one win over a ranked team. I find it hard to group them with a top ten UW team whose only lose is to UM.

While UM's schedule isn't that hard, its more of a fault of some teams being down than UM scheduling three service academies who have not been relevant for 25 years.

UM handily beat most of their opponents while ND had to come back against an average GT team, a horrible MSU team, and a medoicre UCLA team. That, coupled with their blowout loses to the only teams they played anywhere near the Top 15 and it makes ND look really, really bad.

Its not as if ND played a bunch of teams that have been good programs and just happened to be down, as opposed to last year. They played bad programs.

When you don't play in a conference and you don't get consistently good match ups its up to ND to schedule good programs. While its no fault to UM that PSU and Iowa are down, it is NDs fault for scheduling only 4 programs that have been anywhere near top programs in the last 10 or so years: PSU, UM, USC, and GT -- you lost 2 of those and PSU and GT sucked (not your fault, but if you were in a conference other teams would be having good years and ND would be able to be tested).

Here's the difference, genius: ND got the worst beating they've endured in 40 years at HOME by Michigan. Tosu beat Michigan by 3 points at home. Logic would dictate that on a neutral field, the team that originally was the visitor would probably play better. Therefore, Michigan could potentially beat ND by 110 points and possibly beat Tosu.

Two of GTech's losses are directly the result of scheduling two good teams in non conference. If Wisconsin did that, they would most likely have three losses also.

Who on Michigan's schedule is an established team who is down this year, other than Iowa? Certainly not IU, NW, Vandy, Ball St., Central Michigan, or Minnesota. The other two PSU and MSU were on both schedules. You could make a case that Stanford and UNC are decent programs who are down right now also, as both have been to major bowls in the last few years.

Is there really a difference between scheduling three service academies versus Ball St., CMU, or Vandy? I don't see it if there is.

I guess my point is, while the schedule isn't loaded with tough teams, it wasn't any weaker than any Big Ten, Big East, Big 12 schedule.

Also, by no means am I saying ND was a great team because they are not. Like I said in a post earlier in this thread, they are one correctly ranked right now in the 10-12 area.

For what its worth, I also believe that Michigan, OSU, and USC are equals and that any of those three could beat the other on a neutral field.

Notre Dame is guaranteed a BCS berth if they have 9 wins or finish in the top BCS 12 (I think they're no. 10 right now, but I'm too lazy to look.). I think that clause is specifically called the "Notre Dame is special, and you're not" clause. So, while Boise State, credit them, rolls of 12 straight and is hopeful of being a BCS buster on those merits, Notre Dame is assured of one because they fatted their schedule with heavyweights like UNC, Stanford, Army, the Merchant Marines and the Coast Guard Academy. That clause needs to go away, along with Kirk Herbstreit. He can go away too.

I too am very excited at the prospect of a Michigan-LSU game, for all the reasons mentioned in that post. The Miles-Schembechler factor, Michigan just being iconic with Pasadena, Ron English's badass defense, and it just being a change of venue for the Wolverines who has never played that particular SEC team... at least I don't think they have. I admit to being an Buckeye Alum, but every time recently that Herbstreit has been on the air either plugging a Michigan-ND rematch, I have this urge to beat him silly with a tire iron. Who would want to see that? What's there to prove? Did Michigan's spanking of the Irish in South Bend not mean anything? I know anti-ND people like myself will say otherwise, but does America really want to see Michigan beat Notre Dame by 50 in a January bowl game? In the Grandaddy of Them All? Granted, Michigan is going to beat the holy hell out of whatever team they get in Pasadena, but the Irish? I'd rather see Wake Forest against the Irish in the Orange Bowl, that is, if the Irish absolutely have to get a BCS bowl. Notre Dame is more in Wake's league than they are in Michigan's league.

Someone - I too am too lazy to look back and try to find out exactly who compared Vandy to the service academies and wondered why UofM was complaining about ND's USO schedule when UofM had Vandy- well I'm pretty damn sure Vandy would go undefeated against the service academies as well, so that point is moot.

I think the most disparaging aspect of the whole thing is that the same announcers who are campaigning for a Rose rematch are campaigning against a BCS NC rematch. How can the ABC/ESPN analysts (or rather agenda pushers) reconcile the two, seemingly inapposite, arguments?

I would like to hear Herbstreit's justification for asserting conflicting viewpoints, advocating rather than analyzing, and distinguishing between the two possible rematches.

I love guys. It's great to see most of y'all would like to play LSU. Our teams would match up well and make for a great RB. LSU fans would also be alot more fun for pre and post game activities. Email the RB committee and tell them what you think. They won't listen to LSU fans for course.

Just a quick note: calling Samardjiza (however you spell it) overrated is kinda like calling Adrian Peterson or Troy Smith overrated. I dislike ND very much, and definitely think that Smardzjgidjahga looks like a bitch, but the guy is an incredible wideout. That is all.

However, Saturday's demolition of the Golden Domers by USC certainly took some of the luster off a possible Rose Bowl trip for Notre Dame, which hasn't made an appearance in the Granddaddy of Them All since Knute Rockne and the Four Horsemen won the school's first national championship in 1924. Michigan soundly defeated the Irish, 47-21, in South Bend back in September.

"(Rematches are) something the BCS likes to try to avoid," Rose Bowl chief executive Mitch Dorger told the Los Angeles Times. "We are mindful of that. There are a lot of factors to consider."

Glad to see y'all think Herbstreit is as much an idiot as folks in the South do. I wanted to vomit when he talked about what a great match-up ND and Michigan would be. I also thought how embarrassing Musberger was to the sports broadcasting industry for saying that ND should be in the Rose Bowl because ND was in the 1925 Rose Bowl. What????

Herbstreit agreed, and then both tried to convince viewers that the USC/ND game was really close. It is a sad day when college football is subjected to these idiots calling games.

Those announcers are morons. I watched the sunday night football game (colts vs. eagles) and there were technical difficulties so you did not hear madden & michaels, you heard the game & the game announcer. That was cool. So, instead of lobbying for not having a ND rematch, I want to lobby for no announcers (ie: Herbie, Davie, Musberger & Speilman- I know he does espn games, but he is a giant idiot).

Perhaps Herbstreit is hyping a ND-UM rematch because he knows it will do crappy ratings after UM takes a 3 TD lead into the second half of the 1st quarter. The BCS is after all on FOX this year. I think Chad Henne is one of the most underrated players in the country, and beating the Wolverines could propel my Tigers to a pre-season #1 ranking next year. GEAUX TIGERS!!

Thanks for supporting an LSU-Michigan matchup! This would be the highlight of the year for Tigah fans. To get the chance to go toe-to-toe with a Big 10 powerhouse is exciting! The SEC and Big 10 are the only two conferences in college football and to see them on New Year's Day would be a great way to begin 2007.

Besides, tailgating would be a special treat. Cookin' up Jambalaya, Gumbo and Etouffe for the fans of both teams in Southern California would be something to see. AND our fans will geaux - L.A. meets LA. - The thought just makes me giggle. :-)

I think a MU vs LSwho matchup would be outstanding, especially in light of the fact neither team has ever played each other.

Even if God forbid, USC loses to fUcla, I would think a great match up of USC vs MU better than a rematch with tOSU, would rather see tOSU play Florida, and crush them, maybe that would shut the SEC whiny little pukes up?

Not even close. As much as I like college football, I'd be happy to boycott the game altogether if ND gets in.

Let's lay it on the line, is it the SEC or the Big 10+2? LSU had one bad game against Florida but that would be a more interesting rematch, but that won't happen. Auburn, the refs got that one. Maybe the refs should play UM. My biased vote is LSU/UM.

Follow the MZone

Subscribe To

The MZone-slash-MichiganZone.net-slash-MichiganZone.blogspot.com is in no way affiliated with the University of Michigan and/or U-M football in any way. If you thought it was, frankly I'm surprised you know how to use a computer.